D&D 4E Pemertonian Scene-Framing; A Good Approach to D&D 4e

[S'mon]

I find this pretty dismissive. You might not have any trouble buying into some of these 4E mechanics. But a huge swath of the gaming community does.

We know this. I am getting pretty tired of your constant repetition of why you don't like 4e. I know it already. If you don't have anything constructive to say please stop posting in this thread.

 

[Bedrockgames]

We know this. I am getting pretty tired of your constant repetition of why you don't like 4e. I know it already. If you don't have anything constructive to say please stop posting in this thread.

I am not tring to be a jerk here. My intention isn't to clutter up a thread. But a debate about this issue of come and get it emerged before I posted here if I recall and I was responding to a poster's argument about narrative control. I think it is fair for posters to post differing ideas on this subject. i have tried to be clear that i am not opposed to people playing a certain way. But I do have opinions about these things and have tried to be respectful presenting them. When I have stepped in, it wasnt to stop people from playing 4E or to say 4E is bad.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Not familiar with the term plot coupon, but what you describe doesnt appeal to me.

Plot coupons are resources that a player has that let them make some change or get some advantage that is plot related, usually in terms of changing/extending the plot. Some types of examples might be say a game where you can gain a 'blot' in order to use a character attribute to change the story, say your 'greedy' character can accept the police are after him in order to steal some money. The idea being the character's personality matches with the narrative and the player gets to do a little world building.

Action Points in 4e can be seen as plot coupons, they let the player decide that his character gets an a chance to pull off something big, and powers (daily/encounter) can also. 4e's version is a bit fuzzy though, they aren't explicitly called out as coupons, and all those things can also act like in-game type resources, but its a useful way to look at things.

Like many things the value of plot coupons depends a lot on narrative style of game. If you are playing Gygaxian dungeon crawl then plot coupons are pretty much just 'get out of jail free' cards, not particularly exciting though for some genre of game they can still be cool. In a more story oriented game they fit more with the agenda. A game of 4e that is 'fantasy supers' or 'action movie' in tone can really benefit a lot.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I see your point, but this still just doesnt work for me. Movement and attacking are things I feel should be under the control of the character in question unless there is some kind of powerful force taking that away. The issue I have is I am taking direct control of an npc's movement. In martial arts, i can try to lure someone by stepping back or to the side and hoping they follow me, but I cant compel them to stay on me ir move. Or I can give an opening, hoping to lure them into an attack, but again, it is totally up to them what they do with that. I much prefer this sort of thing be left up to the person controling the npc (the GM). If I step back, he might well follow, but doesn't have to. He gets to decide based on the npc, just like i get to decide my movement on battfield based on my pc.if I give an opponening, i would much prefer a mechanic that lowers my AC but gives me a damage boost should I hit on the counter. That way the GM gets to decide based on something much closer to that actual situation (there is an opening, it means something, capitalizing on it has some risk, the npc has to make the choice on what to do).

Hmmmm, try some judo/jujitsu. While it is POSSIBLE for an opponent who is absolutely determined not to move, is strong, and is well-balanced, to stay put they will have to sacrifice any offensive and thus the pace and timing of the fight to accomplish that. I think the notion that a hit with a 'pull' type power is indicating failure of the enemy to hold position BECAUSE they also chose to participate offensively makes sense. Remember, characters can take Total Defense, and/or even shift back 5' if they REALLY don't want to be drawn in.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I find this pretty dismissive. You might not have any trouble buying into some of these 4E mechanics. But a huge swath of the gaming community does. And many of them site issues it presents to immersion. You can try to define it away, or make arguments like "but if you accepted one abstraction in 2E you have to accept a bunch of them now" but it doesn't change the fact that these things can be problematic for some gamers. I have no problem with it not being a problem for you, but I do find it annoying when posters question my own experience of the game or try to discount something like immersion (which for a lot of people is really important).

It is also worth pointing out that immersion does not equal realism. Few people advocating immersion n D&D want a realistic combat simulator.



In 2E you were able to move ten times your movement rate in feet in a round. The kind of moves you could make were also detailed: move up to an opponent, charge, retreat (which included fleeing and withdrawiing), ranged movement. Withdrawing was a bit like the five foot step, where you moved 1/3rd your movement rate. Moving your full move was fleeing and that exposed you to attacks from adjacent foes (a bit like attacks of opportunity).

but because of the turn structure of 2e you would give up your attack to move back 1/3 of your movement rate, and your opponent would then attack you and easily keep in contact. It could be useful now and then, but it was FAR less useful than say in 4e where can shift 5' and then charge, or attack and then shift, or even shift and then move (more options open up with use of certain powers and/or an AP). 4e combats tend to be MUCH more dynamic once battle is joined. Also, since there are rules for things like swinging on a rope, pushing people out of your way, moving past opponents (probably not allowed at all in 2e) there's just a lot more well-defined options.

 

[Manbearcat]

Yeah. I'm pretty sure we've got as much mileage as we're going to get out of this thread. Once discourse degenerates to:

1) "This is how mechanic x functions and how its conducive to the particular playstyle broken down in this thread.'

2) "I don't like the mechanical functionality of x and I don't like the playstyle it supports. Its problematic for my own playstyle because of y."

3) "Ok. Well <attempt to legitimize x or explain it in a different way; perhaps in respect to y>"

4) "Yeah. I still don't like x because of its affect on y in my games."

5) "Well, x doesn't work out that way in my games or it doesn't hurt y or y is different to us."

6) "Well, it does for us and y is important in this way."

7) Go back to 1 and queue Benny Hill theme music.

I think we're just about done here until someone who is interested in learning more frames a question to focus the discussion such that it moves away from the event horizon of 1 - 7 (which most threads seem to inevitably wind their way toward).

 

[Bedrockgames]

Hmmmm, try some judo/jujitsu. While it is POSSIBLE for an opponent who is absolutely determined not to move, is strong, and is well-balanced, to stay put they will have to sacrifice any offensive and thus the pace and timing of the fight to accomplish that. I think the notion that a hit with a 'pull' type power is indicating failure of the enemy to hold position BECAUSE they also chose to participate offensively makes sense. Remember, characters can take Total Defense, and/or even shift back 5' if they REALLY don't want to be drawn in.

Sure I have done Judo and sanshou. But in those circumstances you are pulling and manipulating movement once you have a grip on them. It doesn't happen when the person is away from you. If they want rules for throws or grapples that is fine. But this power never quite struck me as that

 

[Bedrockgames]

, since there are rules for things like swinging on a rope, pushing people out of your way, moving past opponents (probably not allowed at all in 2e) there's just a lot more well-defined options.

This is probably a whole other discussion but you could do anything you wanted in 2E and the GM would ad hoc it. Combat could be as dynamic as you wanted. the structure was looser than 3e or 4e. personally i find that a bit easier to work with but just a preference. There were also a pretty extensive list of maneuvers with mechanics in the complete fighter

 

[LostSoul]

I think we're just about done here until someone who is interested in learning more frames a question to focus the discussion such that it moves away from the event horizon of 1 - 7 (which most threads seem to inevitably wind their way toward).

Here's something I was wondering about:

Can pemertonian scene-framing work for challenge-based games?

I originally thought no, but I read something about 10 pages back by [MENTION=27160]Balesir[/MENTION] that made me question my assumption.

So, do you guys think it can work? If it can, are there any differences in how you use it?

 

[D'karr]

Here's something I was wondering about:

Can pemertonian scene-framing work for challenge-based games?

I originally thought no, but I read something about 10 pages back by [MENTION=27160]Balesir[/MENTION] that made me question my assumption.

So, do you guys think it can work? If it can, are there any differences in how you use it?

Could you expand on what you mean by challenge-based games? I have an idea of what you mean but I don't want to be cross-talking.